View Full Version : Big clubs keen to fill Roos void on Gold Coast
Beaussie
31 Jul 2008, 08:01
Brisbane's wish to play the Pies in consecutive weeks in certainly an interesting development.
Club war looms over scheduling
By Greg Denham
July 31, 2008
AS the AFL executive and the club chief executives began their in-camera summit, a war between the powerful Victorian clubs was mounting over next year's fixtures.
On the first of a two-day meeting between the league and its club chiefs where contentious issues such as the progress of the Gold Coast and the annual special distribution fund was discussed and debated, the biggest battlefield for the clubs is firmly centred on the 22-round 2009 draw.
And in what could be disturbing news for rugby league, badly rattled over the past week by the defection of Sonny Bill Williams to rugby union in France, Carlton is heading for a fight with Collingwood to be represented on the Gold Coast over the next two years.
After learning of Brisbane's fixture wish-list proposal to the AFL to play the Magpies on the Gold Coast next year and in 2010 after the plan was exclusively revealed in The Australian, Carlton chief executive Greg Swann wants in on the action.
"Don't leave us out," Swann said. "We've been working on it for some time now and we are preparing to play at Carrara and promote the code in readiness for the Gold Coast's entry in 2011."
After the AFL initially appeared to be struggling to fill the void of games on the Gold Coast after North Melbourne pulled out of its $1.2m deal next year to host three games, the league has been inundated with willing and strong Melbourne-based clubs to tackle rugby league head-on.
To showcase the code in Australian football's newest market before the Gold Coast start-up, the AFL has held talks with at least three clubs, including the Blues, the Pies and St Kilda.
Matches on the Gold Coast over the next two years will not come cheaply for the league, which will have to contribute far in excess of the original deal for the Kangaroos to warm the seat for the 17th licence.
Brisbane chief executive Michael Bowers said: "For us, it's a no-brainer. The AFL would get millions of dollars of free publicity from the promotional exercise.
"We would be showcasing the game as an entree for the Gold Coast.
"We've talked to the AFL and we believe the league can't put anything other than its best product on, in the area."
Brisbane's radical proposal is to play Collingwood in consecutive matches next season in Queensland either side of a bye. The first game would be played at the Gabba with the next a fortnight later on the Gold Coast, with the winner taking out the Leigh Matthews Cup.
Matthews, who is contracted to coach Brisbane to the end of next year, won his first flag as an AFL coach with Collingwood in 1990, before taking the Lions to three consecutive flags between 2001 and 2003. Bowers said he expected the matches to be sell-outs at both venues.
Collingwood and Carlton are understood to be prepared to stay in the region between games and heavily promote the code and the AFL brand with their star players in marketing and promotional strategies aimed at luring teenagers away from rival codes.
The Blues and the Magpies are preparing to give up a traditional home match in Melbourne and plan to talk to their massive 40,000-plus membership bases on the benefits of a Gold Coast presence.
Bowers said exact details of the Leigh Matthews Cup had not been finalised, but that the trophy would become an annual event.
Brisbane's fixture wish list also includes playing a high-drawing Victorian club at the Gabba on Easter Thursday, where there is already a conflict at club level, with four other clubs vying for the much sought after night fixture.
Collingwood and Geelong want to play each other at the MCG on the eve of Good Friday, as do Carlton and Richmond, who drew more than 72,500 when they met for the first time on Easter Thursday this season.
Brisbane played on Easter Thursday for four years between 2004 and 2007, first against the Magpies, then for three seasons against St Kilda.
Brisbane has also sought interest from North Melbourne on a Kangaroos home game against the Lions at the Gabba next season. Melbourne previously earned between $300,000 and $400,000 a match in a similar exercise for several seasons until last year.
North Melbourne chief executive Eugene Arocca told The Australian that his club had not yet responded to the Lions' invitation.
Arocca said the Kangaroos' priority next season was to play 11 home games in Melbourne, with four games on Friday night, an increase of two on this season.
North Melbourne plays six home games at Telstra Dome this season and two at the MCG. In 2009, the Kangaroos want eight home matches at Telstra Dome, and three at the MCG.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,24103646-23211,00.html
fishmonger
31 Jul 2008, 09:54
Brisbane's proposal makes perfect sense to me. :thumbsu:
If the AFL is serious about GC17 then it needs to save face and this is one way to do it.
Brisbane know what a struggle this market can be.
Both games will be absolute blockbusters and the second on the Gold Coast will feed off they hype generated by the first game (assuming the game is evenly contested).
krudmonk
31 Jul 2008, 10:07
Carlton and Collingwood are just looking to go on tour, a la Euro soccer clubs? How humble of them.
The Blues and the Magpies are preparing to give up a traditional home match in Melbourne
I will bet you they still wont leave Melbourne next year more than 4 times though
Question is, will the AFL forgo Carlton/Collingwood home games that have the potential to draw 50-60,000 in Melbourne?
My money is on St Kilda playing 3 'home' games on the Gold Coast next year, on the basis of only playing 3 'away' interstate games
Harry29
31 Jul 2008, 10:57
I don't think North pulled out of the deal (as stated in the article), the AFL decided that it would be better for the code if North didn't play there next season, and North definately want to play 11 home games in Melbourne but would still honour its contract if a suitable agreement isn't/wasn't reached.
Doctor Jolly
31 Jul 2008, 11:10
I don't think North pulled out of the deal (as stated in the article), the AFL decided that it would be better for the code if North didn't play there next season, and North definately want to play 11 home games in Melbourne but would still honour its contract if a suitable agreement isn't/wasn't reached.
North pulled out of the deal. You only want to say the AFL did so you can get some compensation. Come clean, you arent fooling anyone.
Anyway, what I find interesting is the Bris v Collingwood double header is to become an annual event. Wont that impact the Marlins when they start up.
THRILLHO
31 Jul 2008, 11:23
North didnt pull out of the deal. They have an agreement for 1.2M for three home games in '09. It's in the AFL's interest to renege on the deal so there isnt a situation ala North vs. West Coast where there was barely anyone there. I doubt North is concerned as to how many people show up when they are guaranteed 1.2M.
Having said that, the idea is perfect. Brisbane plays Carlton and Collingwood twice in Queensland. Collingwood is the biggest team in Australia, in any code, and the hype on the Gold Coast would be palpable. Imagine Collingwood in Queensland for three weeks, conducting clinics for the kids and promoting the game. Love or hate Collingwood, they bring the crowds with them.
Harry29
31 Jul 2008, 11:34
North pulled out of the deal. You only want to say the AFL did so you can get some compensation. Come clean, you arent fooling anyone.
Anyway, what I find interesting is the Bris v Collingwood double header is to become an annual event. Wont that impact the Marlins when they start up.
That didn't take long Dr J.
Anyway what will be with negotiations on this particular deal, you and I can only guess, but I don't believe the North Melbourne Football Club has come out and said that we will not play at Carrara next season and that they will not honour the contract. (The club has stated they would like 11 home homes in Melbourne next season) The AFL have clearly stated they would like to explore (and currently are) other avenues and so they should. Compensation comes in many forms and I for one don't really care what type or how, but rest assured that the North Melbourne Football Club will get some sort compensation if they are entitled to it as per their contract with the AFL.
So in summation, my original post was to point out that the journalist may have erred when suggesting North pulled out of the deal, not to become embroiled in a conversation regarding compensation.
i think the AFL should definitely have the new GC side, in whatever incarnation its in, play the opener to all these games, too. be good to be able to come and see the new side and then
would be fantastic to have a GC17 game with the future colours and players followed by brisbane - collingwood game.
Ice-Wolf
31 Jul 2008, 11:58
I think Carlton, Collingwood and St Kilda will each play one game up there on the provision, they each only have one or less trips to Subiaco and Adelaide those years and are excluded from other clubs sold games, i.e. no Tasmania, Darwin or Canberra
North never pulled from the deal. the AFL did.
Jeez i hate the quality of AFL 'journalism'.
SweetLeftFoot
31 Jul 2008, 13:12
i think the AFL should definitely have the new GC side, in whatever incarnation its in, play the opener to all these games, too. be good to be able to come and see the new side and then
would be fantastic to have a GC17 game with the future colours and players followed by brisbane - collingwood game.
That is an excellent idea, one that makes so much sense, and seems so blindingly obvious, that you can almost be guaranteed the AFL won't go ahead with it.
I think Carlton, Collingwood and St Kilda will each play one game up there on the provision, they each only have one or less trips to Subiaco and Adelaide those years and are excluded from other clubs sold games, i.e. no Tasmania, Darwin or Canberra
From memory Essendon also have quite a reasonable amount of support up on the Gold Coast aswell. I can easily see the Big 4 all playing the Gold Coast team up on the Gold Coast for the first few years as they are big draw cards and will help the Gold Coast team gain support.
krudmonk
31 Jul 2008, 13:21
i think the AFL should definitely have the new GC side, in whatever incarnation its in, play the opener to all these games, too. be good to be able to come and see the new side and then
would be fantastic to have a GC17 game with the future colours and players followed by brisbane - collingwood game.
Yeah, it's definitely better to get the city warmed up to their club as soon as possible.
That is an excellent idea, one that makes so much sense, and seems so blindingly obvious, that you can almost be guaranteed the AFL won't go ahead with it.
oh yea of little faith :)
Doctor Jolly
31 Jul 2008, 13:46
That didn't take long Dr J.
Anyway what will be with negotiations on this particular deal, you and I can only guess, but I don't believe the North Melbourne Football Club has come out and said that we will not play at Carrara next season and that they will not honour the contract. (The club has stated they would like 11 home homes in Melbourne next season) The AFL have clearly stated they would like to explore (and currently are) other avenues and so they should. Compensation comes in many forms and I for one don't really care what type or how, but rest assured that the North Melbourne Football Club will get some sort compensation if they are entitled to it as per their contract with the AFL.
So in summation, my original post was to point out that the journalist may have erred when suggesting North pulled out of the deal, not to become embroiled in a conversation regarding compensation.
There is no ambiguity here. North will/have put in a request for next years draw to have all 11 homes games in Melbourne. That CAN ONLY mean, they no longer wish to play home games at the GC. The AFL will most probably say "ok".
North cant have it both ways. If it wants to honour the contract, it should stop saying it wants to not honour the contract (ie wants to play all home games in Melb).
We all know the truth. North want to pull out of the contract so they can sure up their melbourne support to make the a viable melbourne entity. They are playing silly buggers by trying to make it out that its the AFL who want to drop the contract, and therefore get compo. If it wasnt for the compo argument, you'd be out of there in a shot.
At the end of the day, its the AFL who will decide if you get compo or not, no matter who tears up the contract. If they say no, you can fight them in the courts if you like, but they'll simply kill you off. You wont even challange them on home jumpers, so I cant see North having the balls to do anything anti-AFL other than Brayshaw have a whinge on the footy show.
The time has come to stop playing the victim and expecting compensation from an event of your own making.
DJ, get your facts straight BEFORE mouthing off.
Harry29
31 Jul 2008, 15:34
There is no ambiguity here. North will/have put in a request for next years draw to have all 11 homes games in Melbourne. That CAN ONLY mean, they no longer wish to play home games at the GC. The AFL will most probably say "ok".
North cant have it both ways. If it wants to honour the contract, it should stop saying it wants to not honour the contract (ie wants to play all home games in Melb).
We all know the truth. North want to pull out of the contract so they can sure up their melbourne support to make the a viable melbourne entity. They are playing silly buggers by trying to make it out that its the AFL who want to drop the contract, and therefore get compo. If it wasnt for the compo argument, you'd be out of there in a shot.
At the end of the day, its the AFL who will decide if you get compo or not, no matter who tears up the contract. If they say no, you can fight them in the courts if you like, but they'll simply kill you off. You wont even challange them on home jumpers, so I cant see North having the balls to do anything anti-AFL other than Brayshaw have a whinge on the footy show.
The time has come to stop playing the victim and expecting compensation from an event of your own making.
Relax Dr J,
I'm sure the AFL knows what it is doing and I'm sure North know what they are doing. I can't see how we are playing the victim here, we are requesting something from the AFL and they are considering it. We also were asked to move and declined there offer, we put forward a counter offer of 8 games co-location and they declined our offer. We could go on but lets just say you have NFI about the contract and neither do I, the club and the AFL will work it out and I'm sure and there will be some sort of compensation. If there is not then stiff for us. I don't think we are playing silly buggers as you put it we have clearly stated our intention, unlike the AFL who tried to move North by stealth.
Now, the journalist clearly is giving a false impression that we pulled out of the deal as the club has never publicly stated that we will not honour our contract on the Gold Coast. The AFL know it will be a marketing nightmare as witnessed this season, so they should look at other avenues for promoting the game on the Gold Coast before the new team starts up as they are currently doing.
Raiderdave
31 Jul 2008, 16:18
Brisbane's wish to play the Pies in consecutive weeks in certainly an interesting development.
I can see the NRL basing its Schedule around the AFL's
if they want to " Take League on "
then we'll accomodate them .....
the
Titans V Broncos
Titans V Cowboys
Titans V Dragons .... Storm... Roosters .. or who ever
on the same nights as the AFL... at roughly the same time
its a bit naughty , but hey
everything is fair in Love ..... & War now aint it !;)
Subprime
31 Jul 2008, 16:26
I can see the NRL basing its Schedule around the AFL's
if they want to " Take League on "
then we'll accomodate them .....
the
Titans V Broncos
Titans V Cowboys
Titans V Dragons .... Storm... Roosters .. or who ever
on the same nights as the AFL... at roughly the same time
its a bit naughty , but hey
everything is fair in Love ..... & War now aint it !;)
No problem...the AFL will just schedule games on the nights the "French for Travellers" classes are on ;)
Question is, will the AFL forgo Carlton/Collingwood home games that have the potential to draw 50-60,000 in Melbourne?
My money is on St Kilda playing 3 'home' games on the Gold Coast next year, on the basis of only playing 3 'away' interstate games
I'd be happy for St Kilda to have 2-3 games on the Gold Coast so long as we have only 2-3 other interstate trips. We just have less 'home games' in Melbourne and more 'away games'. If the AFL play their cards right they could get 5 games on the Gold Coast.
I can see the NRL basing its Schedule around the AFL's
if they want to " Take League on "
then we'll accomodate them .....
the
Titans V Broncos
Titans V Cowboys
Titans V Dragons .... Storm... Roosters .. or who ever
on the same nights as the AFL... at roughly the same time
its a bit naughty , but hey
everything is fair in Love ..... & War now aint it !;)
I would imagine the AFL will try and avoid the NRL's local derbies in the Gold Coast as it is just common sense. It shouldnt be that hard to do.
I would imagine the AFL will try and avoid the NRL's local derbies in the Gold Coast as it is just common sense. It shouldnt be that hard to do.Bit hard though when the AFL schedules it first and the NRL copies them? Maybe offer them a fiver and the NRL will start running for it?
Doctor Jolly
31 Jul 2008, 17:17
Relax Dr J,
I'm sure the AFL knows what it is doing and I'm sure North know what they are doing. I can't see how we are playing the victim here, we are requesting something from the AFL and they are considering it. We also were asked to move and declined there offer, we put forward a counter offer of 8 games co-location and they declined our offer. We could go on but lets just say you have NFI about the contract and neither do I, the club and the AFL will work it out and I'm sure and there will be some sort of compensation. If there is not then stiff for us. I don't think we are playing silly buggers as you put it we have clearly stated our intention, unlike the AFL who tried to move North by stealth.
Now, the journalist clearly is giving a false impression that we pulled out of the deal as the club has never publicly stated that we will not honour our contract on the Gold Coast. The AFL know it will be a marketing nightmare as witnessed this season, so they should look at other avenues for promoting the game on the Gold Coast before the new team starts up as they are currently doing.
You cannot play 11 home games in Melbourne, and 3 in GC. Impossible. Someones lying.
Doctor Jolly
31 Jul 2008, 17:19
Bit hard though when the AFL schedules it first and the NRL copies them? Maybe offer them a fiver and the NRL will start running for it?
In the long term it wont matter a bit what the NRL do. Let them schedule a big NRL game against Brisbane v Collingwood. Carrara, only 12K or whatever it is, will sell out regardless. Only thing it will do is hurt the NRL crowd.
You've just got to assume that the NRL will be pr1cks and ignore them.
I'd imagine Bris v Coll and Broncos v Titans on the same night would have only one possible result - gridlock!
Don't get carried away, fellas, and ignore the "take on RL" and "promote the code on the GC" c r a p. There's only one reason the clubs would do this, and that's because they've done their sums in comparing those particular matchups at home v playing them for a guaranteed handout from the GC in neutral fixtures that will only be one-offs anyway, and thought "yup, it's worth sacrificing a match or too for a few extra bucks - even a blockbuster".
The only mooted permanent fixture is the Bris v Coll one, and let's not be naive - of course the Lions would suggest it, and of course the Magpies would agree to it, seeing as they get a return on a Qld home game they'd get far less out of in Melbourne - and on top of that, a guarantee minimising interstate away games because they'd be "putting themselves out for the good of the code" (just like my Hawks do!)...the supporters we might all have opinions on, sure, but the Magpies administration ain't stupid...
CoastBhoy
31 Jul 2008, 19:33
Don't get carried away, fellas, and ignore the "take on RL" and "promote the code on the GC" c r a p. There's only one reason the clubs would do this, and that's because they've done their sums in comparing those particular matchups at home v playing them for a guaranteed handout from the GC in neutral fixtures that will only be one-offs anyway, and thought "yup, it's worth sacrificing a match or too for a few extra bucks - even a blockbuster".
The only mooted permanent fixture is the Bris v Coll one, and let's not be naive - of course the Lions would suggest it, and of course the Magpies would agree to it, seeing as they get a return on a Qld home game they'd get far less out of in Melbourne - and on top of that, a guarantee minimising interstate away games because they'd be "putting themselves out for the good of the code" (just like my Hawks do!)...the supporters we might all have opinions on, sure, but the Magpies administration ain't stupid...
And you figured that out by yourself ?? well done.
I think Carlton, Collingwood and St Kilda will each play one game up there on the provision, they each only have one or less trips to Subiaco and Adelaide those years and are excluded from other clubs sold games, i.e. no Tasmania, Darwin or Canberra
Rumour is St Kilda will be an opponent of Hawthorn's in Tasmania next year, probably makes sense given it's probably our lowest drawing game in Melbourne, Fremantle, WC, Port and Adelaide aside
Wouldn't surprise me if the Saints get a similar deal to the Bulldogs this year, who like St Kilda had big hype and a decent draw in 2007 but failed to deliever.
I'd imagine Bris v Coll and Broncos v Titans on the same night would have only one possible result - gridlock!
That and the AFL getting smashed in the ratings up here again.
For the good of the game, the AFL can't afford to take on the Broncos deby's and large drawing games head on.
Copernicus
31 Jul 2008, 22:37
I'd imagine Bris v Coll and Broncos v Titans on the same night would have only one possible result - gridlock!
They already did that this year - it might have been Broncos vs NQ, but either way, there were still 85,000 people congesting the city streets.
Same situation would result which is why I'd reckon the NRL would be loathe to do that again - given that they saw what happened (and yes, they still won head to head) and they'd probably rather give Brisbane folks a break from that potential situation again.
Zero's idea of having the GC team play a curtain raiser is brilliant and one would think that it figures in the thinking of the AFL re: this fixturing possibility. Even if it is just a TAC match, at least it is something concrete for the locals.
CoastBhoy
1 Aug 2008, 07:19
That and the AFL getting smashed in the ratings up here again.
For the good of the game, the AFL can't afford to take on the Broncos deby's and large drawing games head on.
What do you mean again ?? if you are talking about those games a month ago , Titans played at 5.30 , Roos played at 7.30.
Azzballz Deluxe
1 Aug 2008, 21:55
Bit hard though when the AFL schedules it first and the NRL copies them? Maybe offer them a fiver and the NRL will start running for it?
Someone correct me i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure that the NRL brings out thier round by round fixture before the AFL. But where the AFL has every game set in stone at a specific time and date, the NRL doesn't decide on which game of a particular round is on a friday night/saturday arvo/monday night etc, until a couple of weeks before that round, to ensure the best match-up gets prime-time exposure.
Yes? :confused:
You cannot play 11 home games in Melbourne, and 3 in GC. Impossible. Someones lying.
Is that like Swans can't play 11 games in Sydney and 2 games at Manuka? ;)
Is that like Swans can't play 11 games in Sydney and 2 games at Manuka? ;)
Yes but both those are away games as both the Western Bulldogs and Melbourne Demons sell their home games against Sydney to Manuka.
And you figured that out by yourself ?? well done.
You'd be surprised what the ability to read can yield, d i c k h e a d. And since I was the first poster here to actually put it down here in this complete form, if I was you I'd stick my head back up my a r s e where it belongs...anyone who's been around here long enough will know that I'm about as pro-North as a non-Roo can get, so don't bite the hand of the only friend you guys have got...
What do you mean again ?? if you are talking about those games a month ago , Titans played at 5.30 , Roos played at 7.30.
March 28, Friday Night - Brisbane v Collingwood at the Gabba and the Broncos v Cowboys at Lang Park at the same time...
Raiderdave
2 Aug 2008, 13:23
Someone correct me i'm wrong, but i'm pretty sure that the NRL brings out thier round by round fixture before the AFL. But where the AFL has every game set in stone at a specific time and date, the NRL doesn't decide on which game of a particular round is on a friday night/saturday arvo/monday night etc, until a couple of weeks before that round, to ensure the best match-up gets prime-time exposure.
Yes? :confused:
The NRL release their draw after the AFL , in Mid to Late November.
they only allocate games to days 5 weeks in advance.
they will know what the AFL is doing before they do.
Beaussie
2 Aug 2008, 13:42
Not sure how accurate Caro is here but interesting comments about the potential stadium for the Gold Coast.
Trio tipped to play on Coast
Caroline Wilson | August 2, 2008
COLLINGWOOD, Carlton and St Kilda have been nominated by the AFL as the three preferred Victorian clubs to fly the Australian football flag on the Gold Coast next season.
With North Melbourne tonight hosting its final Carrara game under the broken three-year agreement that has been cut short by one season and four games, fixturing boss Gillon McLachlan is close to reaching a deal for 2009 with the Magpies, Blues and Saints.
Although four home-and-away games had been earmarked for next season at Carrara, the AFL will underwrite three games and a pre-season clash on the Gold Coast at a cost of $1.2 million as part of its promotional strategy leading up to the introduction of the 17th club in 2011.
All three clubs have indicated they are prepared to relinquish one home game to travel to Carrara for $400,000 apiece — money that would have gone to the financially struggling Kangaroos, who have chosen instead to fight to secure their future in Melbourne.
Collingwood, whose president Eddie McGuire revealed late last year that he was looking at three or four Gold Coast games but was not prepared to give away those fixtures as home games, should prove the final piece in the jigsaw and is the only club of the three not to have officially agreed to the 2009 Gold Coast scheduling agreement.
But the club has shown enthusiasm to travel to the Gold Coast and help promote the code in its crucial lead-up to 2011.
The Magpies reportedly had looked at consecutive Queensland clashes against the Brisbane Lions over a three-week period, with the mid-season bye in between and one game at the Gabba and one at Carrara, a prospect AFL executives were lukewarm about.
Carlton chief executive Greg Swann confirmed last night that the Blues had spoken with the AFL regarding one home game at Carrara in place of one of the club's six contracted Telstra Dome clashes, which would mean the club played five games respectively at the Docklands and the MCG, with one at Carrara, probably against Adelaide.
St Kilda boss Archie Fraser said the Saints had been buoyed not only by their good form at Carrara against North Melbourne earlier this season but by the strong support their fans had shown for the fixture. Between 6000 and 7000 St Kilda supporters attended the game, according to the club.
Fraser said he would have welcomed two home games at Carrara over consecutive weeks, with a potential Gabba fixture in between, but would welcome one game against any rival, preferably immediately before the mid-season break.
The three-way split preferred by the AFL is expected to be confirmed next week as the competition works through a series of fixturing requests by clubs.
In the meantime, the competition's governing body has remained ultra-sensitive to the question of a home stadium for the new Gold Coast team, which is expected to be funded now in a three-way split between the competition itself along with both private and public money.
With four potential and as yet undeveloped sites on the AFL's long-term plan — all strategically placed near key railway stops — no stadium is expected to be developed in time for the new club's 2011 debut, meaning Carrara will remain the AFL's Gold Coast venue at least until 2013.
Several million dollars will potentially be invested into creating further infrastructure at Carrara. This will include training facilities and offices for the new club, which could ultimately retain the stadium as its home training base while playing its home games elsewhere.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/trio-tipped-to-play-on-coast/2008/08/01/1217097534898.html
krudmonk
2 Aug 2008, 16:01
Sorry to be a nerd, but is this thread really worthy of the "GC17" tag? It's not so much about the expansion club as it is some of the "big four" looking to pillage a new market.
Professor Knowall
2 Aug 2008, 17:32
Sorry to be a nerd, but is this thread really worthy of the "GC17" tag? It's not so much about the expansion club as it is some of the "big four" looking to pillage a new market.
Its well worth a thread. It's about the AFL using the the "big four" to help develop the local GC market for the expansion club, after the North Melbourne 'Vandals' pillaged the place following on from its previous destructive forays into Sydney and Canberra.
Yes but both those are away games as both the Western Bulldogs and Melbourne Demons sell their home games against Sydney to Manuka.
So what is the difference if 3 Vic teams sell 1 home game to the AFL to play it up on the GC and it is against us? That is the same analogy. Swans dont pay anything, the AFL does.
Not that I think it will happen, but everyone laughed when Sydney said they should play the games in Canberra as away games and it happened.
Anyway, whatever happens is just a short-term arrangement, means nothing in the end. Swans' advantage will evaporate as well when a 3rd stadium is build in Melbourne.